May v. Walker
Supreme Court of Minnesota
The plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Washington county, and duly recovered judgment against the defendants. After the commencement of the action, Austin T. Jenks was duly garnished, and upon his disclosure it appeared that he had in his hands a large amount of money which he had received and held as assignee under an assignment made by the defendants, who were partners as Walker, Judd & Veazie, of their partnership property only.
Read the full summary
The plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Washington county, and duly recovered judgment against the defendants. After the commencement of the action, Austin T. Jenks was duly garnished, and upon his disclosure it appeared that he had in his hands a large amount of money which he had received and held as assignee under an assignment made by the defendants, who were partners as Walker, Judd & Veazie, of their partnership property only. Other terms of the assignment are stated in the opinion. Plaintiff appeals from a judgment, ordered by Crosby, J., discharging the garnishee.
1Opinion of the CourtBeeey, J.
The assignment in this ease was evidently intended to be a voluntary one, under our insolvent act. Laws 1881, c. 148. The only voluntary assignment there authorized is of all the debtor's property and estate not exempt by law. By its express terms the present is an assignment by a partnership firm of partnership property exclusively. It is therefore, upon its face, & partial assignment, instead of one in terms general, such as the insolvent act unmistakably contemplates. Many of the provisions of that act are irreconcilable with any *196other construction, and notably those of section 10,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- National Park Bank v. LanahanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1883
- Hennessy v. Western BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1843
- State v. BilanskySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1859
- Seager v. BurnsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1860
- Chaska Co. v. Board of SupervisorsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1861
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Hawkins v. IrelandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
- Hanson v. MetcalfSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
- Maclaren v. KramarNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1913
- Swofford Bros. Dry-Goods Co. v. MillsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Wyoming · 1898
- In re AllenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.